Yes and no because the movies weren't really for kids, so it was a gateway drug/entrypoint into the comics. It is actually fairly likely I wouldn't have gotten into superhero comics without it and I'm the biggest nerd of all. It was a 'best of' collection of greatest hits of continuity- I actually think Spider-Man '94 did a similar thing well for that universe, where you could just watch the show and have a fairly good idea of the lore- so it pretty much set the standard. To the point where Batman Forever and Batman & Robin were taking their cues from what people knew of the show. I still resent the Nolan movies just a little bit for ignoring what BTAS set up, but perhaps we were spoiled.I've been thinking about this. Even though both Batman live-action movies were hits, DC was never really able to capitalize on them, and the second one got a lot of negative publicity for its darker, downbeat tone. Batman: The Animated Series on the other hand was praised by most critics and fans, and pretty much had something for everyone. It's arguably the most beloved Batman media out there. Anyone else agree?
I still think DC, instead of rebooting the canon constantly in the comics, should just have the general continuity of the show as a framework to base what we know of the characters on. For instance stop trying to call Clayface "Basil Karlo;" rightly or wrongly most people including longtime comic fans are going to think he's Matt Hagen, that Kirk Langstrom has a wife named Francine, that Harvey Dent was Bruce Wayne's best friend, etc etc. When they try to push back against this such as making Mr Freeze a stalker of Nora or Jeph Loeb's weird insistence that Bruce and Harvey dislike each other, it chafes at what's been proven to work and ingrained.